Collegiate/professional sports is not "just a game"

Often said after a sports loss by commentators: "(so much fuss/violence/devastation over this): It's just a game."

But it is not just a game. If a sport is being contested at NCAA/professional/World Cup levels, it is not just a game - it has become an industry in which the careers and livelihoods of many, emotions of an entire city/region/nation and billions of dollars are involved, not to mention untold amounts of gambling.

IMHO, it is a platitude/cliche, but it is wrong - if it has gotten to that level, it by definition has exceeded a mere "game" and is a whole lot more than a game. It could only be called "just a game" if there were nothing substantial at stake.
1

It is just a game, which is why it's so absurd that there's such a huge industry built up around it.

Your posting history suggests an affinity for superhero movies. Well, gosh, that's just a bunch of fairy tales. Is it absurd that a huge industry - one much, much bigger than any professional sport - has built up around it?

Unless your position is that ALL entertainment that becomes commercial is absurd, it makes no sense to single out big time sports as absurd. I don't see what's so much more absurd around the Dallas Cowboys pulling in $800 million a year when mid-range Marvel movies make that much (not even counting merchandising.)

Do you like music? That's a big damn business. The Beatles just put out a bunch of pop songs but they made a zigateen grillion dollars. Stephen King books are just genre novels, which have generated the riches of Croesus. Game of Thrones was a TV fairy tale that made more money than a dragon could carry. World of Warcraft is just a video game, but it's made a ludicrous amount of money. Chris Rock is just a guy who tells jokes, but Netflix paid him $40 million for do two specials.

Look, baseball and hockey and basketball are just games. But why shouldn't games matter? If you don't like games that's fine, but suggesting other people's enjoyment of it is "Absurd" is every bit as asinine and mean as me saying that people liking rock music, paintings, opera, stage musicals or board games.
5

It could only be called "just a game" if there were nothing substantial at stake.

There wasn't anything more substantial at stake in the Super Bowl than there was in the Game of Thrones finale.

They are both entertainment products, at the conclusion of which, fans will recognize one character (or group of characters) as having Won the Game. No matter how much baggage fans attach to that outcome, it remains the crowning of a champion over a wholly artificial conglomeration of ideas. The actual game itself, the exact champion that gets crowned, is incidental compared to the reaction of fans.

The game itself is really a proxy, it's the watercooler around which we congregate. The important part of that isn't the watercooler, it's the people coming together. The watercooler itself has value as the focal point, but we shouldn't mistake it for the watercooler itself being super important.
6

It is just a game, which is why it's so absurd that there's such a huge industry built up around it.

Seems like I've seen quite a few threads lately where I strongly agreed with the first response.

I cannot understand why so many people put so much of their emptions into the hands of sports organizations, and why our society promotes it so strongly (public schools, media coverage, etc.) Likely goes back to the Romans and before. Distract the masses. Provide an artificial basis for a feeling of unity...

I often think back to a Parker novel, where the protagonist stops in a bar where a few daytime drinkers are watching a game. As Parker put it, "Interested in OTHER PEOPLE'S successes and failures." (paraphrased from memory)
7

I cannot understand why so many people put so much of their emptions into the hands of sports organizations, and why our society promotes it so strongly (public schools, media coverage, etc.) Likely goes back to the Romans and before. Distract the masses. Provide an artificial basis for a feeling of unity...

Replace “sports organizations” with (take your pick) “video games”, “television shows”, “music acts”, “novel series”... Your statement is just as valid. Your complaint about people getting too emotionally invested in any form of entertainment is not without justification. Entertainment should be a distraction from things that cause emotional distress, not a source of it.

There’s nothing about a sporting event that makes it any better or worse than other forms of entertainment. In all cases, successful sources of entertainment end up with people being paid extravagant sums of money for doing something ultimately trivial.

People rag on sports because they don’t like sports and think people that do are dumb. Then they go back to obsessing over their favorite TV show. Hypocrisy is all too common.
8

There wasn't anything more substantial at stake in the Super Bowl than there was in the Game of Thrones finale.

As I see it, sports and fiction are two different sides of the coin. The Super Bowl is real, but it doesn't matter. Game of Thrones is invented, but it does matter (in-universe).

With sports, much of the enjoyment comes from pretending that it does matter who wins. Many people enjoy sports this way, and are fully aware that they're just pretending; but some people take it too far and don't know when to stop pretending.

With fiction (in whatever form—books, movies, TV), much of the enjoyment comes from willing suspension of disbelief: pretending that what is being depicted actually happens to someone we care about, rather than being made-up people engaged in made-up events.

Quote:

The game itself is really a proxy, it's the watercooler around which we congregate. The important part of that isn't the watercooler, it's the people coming together. The watercooler itself has value as the focal point, but we shouldn't mistake it for the watercooler itself being super important.

Agreed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dinsdale

I cannot understand why so many people put so much of their emptions into the hands of sports organizations, and why our society promotes it so strongly (public schools, media coverage, etc.) Likely goes back to the Romans and before. Distract the masses. Provide an artificial basis for a feeling of unity...

Because emotions are fun, and they make us feel alive, and a feeling of unity feels good, so we take these things wherever we can get them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atamasama

Entertainment should be a distraction from things that cause emotional distress, not a source of it.

Except that people seem to genuinely like entertainment that causes emotional distress (e.g. tragedies, horror). Catharsis is one theory why.
9

Replace “sports organizations” with (take your pick) “video games”, “television shows”, “music acts”, “novel series”... Your statement is just as valid. Your complaint about people getting too emotionally invested in any form of entertainment is not without justification. Entertainment should be a distraction from things that cause emotional distress, not a source of it.

There’s nothing about a sporting event that makes it any better or worse than other forms of entertainment. In all cases, successful sources of entertainment end up with people being paid extravagant sums of money for doing something ultimately trivial.

People rag on sports because they don’t like sports and think people that do are dumb. Then they go back to obsessing over their favorite TV show. Hypocrisy is all too common.

Fair points all. But ISTM that the breadth and depth of sports media coverage and fan identity far exceeds the other entertainments. Perhaps there are a few TV shows or movies that will generate wide coverage and interest, but I'd suggest those are far more exceptional than a run-of-the-mill college or pro football game.
10

It is just a game, which is why it's so absurd that there's such a huge industry built up around it.

But that's kind of circular, though. If "a game" has gotten to the point where there is a huge industry, and billions of dollars at stake, and many careers at stake, and even the economic performance or stock market of a region or nation can be affected by a sports outcome, then it by definition is no longer "just a game" and it has become something a lot more substantial than that.
12

I guess. Personally, I prefer not to put myself in a situation where my emotions are significantly affected by the success or failure of someone I don't know in an activity I don't care about.

Disclosure: I'm a lifelong Green Bay Packers fan; I have season tickets, and I'm a shareholder.

Maybe 15 years ago or so, I found myself getting very stressed out and upset when I'd watch Packer games. I'd scream at the television, I'd punch pillows. Yes, *positive* emotions are fun, but negative emotions -- not so much.

I decided that, even though it was OK to like sports, and follow my favorite teams, that becoming so invested in a game that it was affecting my mental health just wasn't a good thing. I try to take a less emotionally-invested approach to watching now, and if I realize that I'm getting too worked up, I'll turn the channel or walk away.
13

I had the same sort of epiphany in college. My alma mater takes football VERY seriously, and a lot of people really get wound up about it- like seriously angry or dismayed if we don't play well, and react as if it's life or death.

I realized that was completely stupid; win or lose, I was still going to go out after the game, still going to wake up on Sunday morning, still going to study, go to class, etc... and the only thing that the outcome of the game changed would be the topic of conversation, and what was printed in the campus newspaper. (it was pre-WWW when I had this epiphany).

So now I just watch for enjoyment- I like seeing my team win, but I don't really care much if they lose, or if they win a national/conference/division championship.
14

I decided that, even though it was OK to like sports, and follow my favorite teams, that becoming so invested in a game that it was affecting my mental health just wasn't a good thing. I try to take a less emotionally-invested approach to watching now, and if I realize that I'm getting too worked up, I'll turn the channel or walk away.

I am the same. I’m a Seahawks fan and sometimes if a game is too stressful I just walk away. I often do the dishes so that I can somewhat hear what’s going on but I’m doing something productive rather than stressing out that the QB just got sacked and they have to punt yet AGAIN. And if it gets really bad I turn it off completely and do something else.

Maybe I’m a bad sports fan? I’m sure that both of us got stressed watching the NFC Championship game a few years back, when the Seahawks were getting blown out by the Packers in CenturyLink (Russell threw 5 interceptions if I remember right) then suddenly came back to win. It sucked for me watching the game the first half and probably sucked for you watching the second half. Even though winning that game was a miracle it’s not an experience I’d repeat.

Meanwhile, SB 48 when the Hawks demolished Denver 43-8 should have been a boring game. It was totally one-sided. But it was the best game I ever watched. There was no stress because the game was decided pretty early on and I just got to watch the favored team get stomped on.

Again, maybe I’m a bad fan. But I hate getting too stressed watching a game. And I agree, it really is just a game and has no true meaning in my life so it’s not worth getting too worked up. At least that’s how I feel about it.
16

I don't think I was ever a "rabid" fan. Well, I guess I used to be sufficiently into the Bulls that I listened to their pre-game shows on the radio. And yeah, I was disappointed when they couldn't get past Boston or Detroit, and then satisfied when the won again and again - until it almost got boring.

For me, the less I paid attention, the less interesting sports became. At one point I got pre-season publications, participated in pools, etc. But if I didn't keep up on the teams' rosters and records, I was less interested in watching just any game.

Sports is weird, tho, in that it can drag you into just about any meaningless contest. You can be somewhere and an event you couldn't care less about comes on the TV. If you don't make an effort to avoid it, you may find your eye drawn back to the TV. And even if you've never heard of a single player on either side, you might find yourself rooting for one or the other, and feeling your emotions getting involved.

I don't like that kind of sensation. As someone who used to overuse various substances, it reminds me of addiction and manipulation. As a general rule, I'd rather be doing something myself, than watch other people do things.
17

Maybe I’m a bad sports fan? I’m sure that both of us got stressed watching the NFC Championship game a few years back, when the Seahawks were getting blown out by the Packers in CenturyLink (Russell threw 5 interceptions if I remember right) then suddenly came back to win. It sucked for me watching the game the first half and probably sucked for you watching the second half. Even though winning that game was a miracle it’s not an experience I’d repeat.

Yeah; even though that game was years after I decided I was going to keep myself from getting so very invested in Packer games, the final quarter of that one was pretty excruciating. It was like watching a slow-motion crash.
18

I am the same. I’m a Seahawks fan and sometimes if a game is too stressful I just walk away. I often do the dishes so that I can somewhat hear what’s going on but I’m doing something productive rather than stressing out that the QB just got sacked and they have to punt yet AGAIN. And if it gets really bad I turn it off completely and do something else.

Maybe I’m a bad sports fan? I’m sure that both of us got stressed watching the NFC Championship game a few years back, when the Seahawks were getting blown out by the Packers in CenturyLink (Russell threw 5 interceptions if I remember right) then suddenly came back to win. It sucked for me watching the game the first half and probably sucked for you watching the second half. Even though winning that game was a miracle it’s not an experience I’d repeat.

Meanwhile, SB 48 when the Hawks demolished Denver 43-8 should have been a boring game. It was totally one-sided. But it was the best game I ever watched. There was no stress because the game was decided pretty early on and I just got to watch the favored team get stomped on.

Again, maybe I’m a bad fan. But I hate getting too stressed watching a game. And I agree, it really is just a game and has no true meaning in my life so it’s not worth getting too worked up. At least that’s how I feel about it.

As a Cowboys fan I feel the same way about Super Bowl XXVII, the one where they beat the Bills 52-17. That was the best football game I've ever watched.

As far as sports being "just" a game, as others have mentioned if it was just a game, by definition it wouldn't have the huge billion dollar industries and media coverage surrounding it.
19

As far as sports being "just" a game, as others have mentioned if it was just a game, by definition it wouldn't have the huge billion dollar industries and media coverage surrounding it.

That's the trick, it's the surrounding stuff that is important, not the game itself.

Imagine something that is inherently important, like crop yields, sewage treatment, or unemployment. They stay vitally important whether or not they get reported on, whether or not there's public interest in the topic. You can't really say it's "just" our nation's food supply*.

But a MLB game that nobody is interested in watching may as well be a 50+ seniors softball league for all the importance it has. It's just a bunch of guys throwing a ball around and swinging a stick.

Fair points all. But ISTM that the breadth and depth of sports media coverage and fan identity far exceeds the other entertainments. Perhaps there are a few TV shows or movies that will generate wide coverage and interest, but I'd suggest those are far more exceptional than a run-of-the-mill college or pro football game.

If one is going by dollars, I don't see how this can possibly be true. The U.S. film industry - this is just cinema - is as large as the four big professional sports leagues combined, by revenue. That is, again, just cinema, not dedicated TV< like Game of Thrones. The U.S. music industry is roughly as big as the movie industry. I can't find a figure for TV, but it's gotta be enormous, surely?

The shape of fandom is different; most people are a dedicated fan of only a few sports teams, but a fan of many movies and TV shows. That's just the nature of movies and TV shows, though; it's not reflective of the relative popularity of those things.
21

If one is going by dollars, I don't see how this can possibly be true. The U.S. film industry - this is just cinema - is as large as the four big professional sports leagues combined, by revenue. ...

Yeah - and I've heard that gaming exceeds basically all other entertainment combined.

But I think you are twisting things somewhat by using $ as your yardstick, and comparing interest in an entire art form, with fandom of a particular team/or interest in a particular game. You think it comparable to say, "I'm an Eagles fan" as "I like to go to the movies." I think those somewhat different statements.

I think a better comparison to the OP would be to say, "Avengers (or Citizen Kane, or whatever) is just a movie." Or maybe comparing (specific team) fandom, to Star Trek groupies.

When the Avengers came out, there was a lot of advertising and press. Avengers is pretty exceptional in terms of earnings. Would that compare to a Super Bowl? March Madness? How does the interest and resources spent compare? I don't know. But I think there are a lot more regular sports "blockbusters" than Avengers movies.

I admit that cities compete to attract the film industry. We'd have to compare it with expenditures to attract/keep sports francishes. Again, are those efforts made towards a specific team/movie, or an industry? And people spend money for posters, clothing, etc for both sports and movies.

While "just a game" might rightly only be applied to sports, other forms of entertainment have the same concept. Fans who get too deep into a tv or movies series might be told to "get a life". That Shatner appearance on Saturday Night Live was a "just a game" moment for Star Trek fans.
23

When it comes to sports, I think amateur/pro status determines who can really afford to say, "It's just a game."

If you're playing in college and your goal is to turn pro and make a living playing a sport, then at that point in your life, it's more than just a game. An ill-timed injury could derail your whole career.

But for the star players who are already making lifetimes worth of money every season, they can afford to sit back and say, "It's just a game." There are countless athletes who have been quoted saying how they are so grateful they get to play a game for a living.

Just recently, Giannis Antetokounmpo interviewed after the Bucks game 3 loss in the Eastern Conference Finals:

Quote:

Antetokounmpo was the last player to leave the locker room Sunday night. He sat in front of his locker, sipping a blue Gatorade and answering questions from lingering reporters. When asked whether he was disappointed in how he played in Game 3, though, he stood up.

"Hell no," Antetokounmpo told ESPN, pushing himself up from the locker bench. He began to walk away, before turning back around and explaining further.

"I am Giannis," Antetokounmpo said, putting his hand on his chest. "What I have done in my life so far -- sending money to my family, put my brothers in private schools, taking care of family in Nigeria and Greece. Disappointed in a game? I'd be disappointed in myself if I was disappointed."

Humans are tribal, and sports are one of the most visceral ways to tap into that in modern life.

I tend to agree, but I think it misses the point. I grew up in West Virginia and WVU football and basketball are an "us v. them" sort of thing. Likewise, and to a lesser extent, Pittsburgh is the closest large city to my part of the state so it is sort of an adopted home, where we go to the "big city" so the Pirates, Steelers, and Penguins are all part of that tribalism (but not Pitt, to hell with them; people from WV hate fucking Pitt)

All that being said, it is not like the WVU teams are made up from a bunch of true blooded West Virginians who showed up to Morgantown to try out for the teams. Most of them come from Florida or other places across the country. It is very rare to land a West Virginian on a WVU team.

Same with Pittsburgh. It's not like the Pirates pass out cards at the local Primanti Bros. sandwich shop or call on the local yinzers to show up at PNC Park to form a baseball team. The players come from everywhere.

So, why does this tribalism extend to teams composed of people nowhere near like "us"?
26

If you're not a tribal person, then they really are "just games." Fun, interesting games, some of them, but games nevertheless. I'll never let myself get vested in a team again, at least as long as billionaires own teams and schools won't extend full liberties to their scholarship athletes.
31

Maybe collegiate and professional sports are "just a game" but when you look at high school sports it is much more serious. Watch the series or movies or read the book for Friday Night Lights.

QB1 on Netflix is well worth watching. Each of the 2 series follows the senior year of the 3 best high school quarterbacks. The first season featured Jake Fromm the now Georgia QB. The second had Sam Hartman of Wake Forest. Very, very serious stuff.
32

On thinking about it more, it's not the size of the industry that I object to; it's how cancerous it is. Sure, the movie industry and the music industry are as big as the sports industry. And sure, schools have music programs and theater programs as well as sports programs. But music and theater don't take over schools the way sports do. No drama director would ever tell teachers "You have to give this kid a passing grade; he's my best actor", and if he did, no teacher would ever take him seriously. You don't see schools dropping half their budget on a great orchestra conductor, and then give him some sinecure "teaching" load that he's totally unqualified for just to justify it.
34

On thinking about it more, it's not the size of the industry that I object to; it's how cancerous it is. Sure, the movie industry and the music industry are as big as the sports industry. And sure, schools have music programs and theater programs as well as sports programs. But music and theater don't take over schools the way sports do. No drama director would ever tell teachers "You have to give this kid a passing grade; he's my best actor", and if he did, no teacher would ever take him seriously. You don't see schools dropping half their budget on a great orchestra conductor, and then give him some sinecure "teaching" load that he's totally unqualified for just to justify it.

No argument here. But of course this only applies to "big time" college sports. It doesn't apply to professional sports; and it doesn't apply to a small liberal arts college's football team, or their volleyball team or their field hockey team.
35

It applies even at the middle and high school level. I was in the break room at one middle school, where one of the other teachers there (apparently, the football coach) said that he hoped the local Catholic elementary school burned down, and when one of the other teachers protested that her kids went there, he amended it to say that he hoped those two kids specifically got out before the school burned down. Why did he hate the Catholic schools so much? Because he was tired of having to tell the high school football coach that his star players were going to Catholic schools instead.

Can you imagine that level of toxicity coming out of the choir or drama club?
36

Seems like I've seen quite a few threads lately where I strongly agreed with the first response.

I cannot understand why so many people put so much of their emptions into the hands of sports organizations, and why our society promotes it so strongly (public schools, media coverage, etc.) Likely goes back to the Romans and before. Distract the masses. Provide an artificial basis for a feeling of unity...

I often think back to a Parker novel, where the protagonist stops in a bar where a few daytime drinkers are watching a game. As Parker put it, "Interested in OTHER PEOPLE'S successes and failures." (paraphrased from memory)

Can you imagine that level of toxicity coming out of the choir or drama club?

In our area, public high schools compete to lure football coaches from other schools.. There have been fights at area football and basketball games. The coaches' salaries compare with the highest other teachers receive - presumably the coaches teach PE classes. And the football budget surely outpaces the band/theater/art departments combined. Not to mention coverage of high school sports - compared to other HS activities - in the local papers and on TV.
44

I don't think it's a big problem that there's a giant industry around college sports -- the big problem is that this giant industry is extremely corrupt as well as being extremely unfair to the athletes.
45

Maybe collegiate and professional sports are "just a game" but when you look at high school sports it is much more serious. Watch the series or movies or read the book for Friday Night Lights.

Yeah, but that is so, so regional. Nobody but a some parents and a few nutty boosters gave a shit about HS sports at my school/in my city. Really the( small )stands were three-quarters empty for football games, with the one exception of the cross-town "big game." And jocks were not particularly worshiped as a class in HS.
46

Yeah, but that is so, so regional. Nobody but a some parents and a few nutty boosters gave a shit about HS sports at my school/in my city. Really the( small )stands were three-quarters empty for football games, with the one exception of the cross-town "big game." And jocks were not particularly worshiped as a class in HS.

Honestly, same with me. I grew up in the Pacific Northwest and nobody gave a crap. Honestly I think the scholar kids were more popular than the jocks.
47

As soon as money is involved in any way, it's not "just a game" any more.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Velocity

Are there any non-US nations in which collegiate or high school sports are a huge deal?

Kinda, maybe ? I went to a high school founded in Napoleon's era that has/had a Thing about its rugby team. I never really did follow what they did and whatnot, or who they played against and when ; but we all knew the "sporetz" (that's short for "Sport Etudes", a sports related scholarship) enjoyed a lot of institutional privilege within the school and never got held back grades no matter how dismal their academic record or how many classes they skipped for training.
At the same time it's really not like US college sports - there wasn't any TV station broadcasting their matches or anything, nor did our school have a humongous rugby stadium built - in fact there wasn't even one on the grounds, they had to be bussed to a field in the next town over. It was mostly about "Our school is really fucking Good At Rugby, OK ?!". I assume it competed with other schools who were Good At Rugby for bragging rights or somesuch ?
50

__________________--- ---
Assume I'm right and you're wrong - we'll both save a lot of time.

ST's vBulletin 3 Responsive Styles

Our newly refreshed styles in 2017, brings the old vb3 to the new level, responsive and modern feel. It comes with 3 colors with or without sidebar, fixed sized or fluid. Default vbulletin 3 style made responsive also available in the pack.
Purchase Our Style Pack Now